Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 27th Nov 2009 20:45 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Now this is an interesting case. Late last week news got out that Apple is refusing to repair machines still under AppleCare from customers who smoke, citing health risks from second-hand smoke. Wait, what?
Order by: Score:
Wrong as can be!
by Janvl on Fri 27th Nov 2009 20:57 UTC
Janvl
Member since:
2007-02-20

Stating that:
"this is of course yet another sign of the ridiculousness of the anti-smoking lobby"
is proof of a grave misunderstanding of the problem of smoking. If you had a tiny little bit of experience with working in a hospital you would not make such unintelligent remarks.

Reply Score: 7

RE: Wrong as can be!
by Karitku on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:30 UTC in reply to "Wrong as can be!"
Karitku Member since:
2006-01-12

Stating that: "this is of course yet another sign of the ridiculousness of the anti-smoking lobby" is proof of a grave misunderstanding of the problem of smoking. If you had a tiny little bit of experience with working in a hospital you would not make such unintelligent remarks.

And by common sense and listening experts you can easily come conclusion that EVERYTHING is dangerous to your health. Eating, drinking, shacking, smoking, hell even exercising can be devastating to your health.

I'm sure that in this current climate of nanny legistation driven by so green-communists everything has to be banned and people can't enjoy anything. And thats the point of smoking, some people enjoy smoking and some other do it relief stress. But back to point.

Should smoking be banned? No it's not that dangerous and by now all should know hazards of smoking. Should tobacco be highly taxed? Yes, because people who smoke cost more to society. Does Apple have right to avoid warranty because smoking? NO f--kING WAY! What's next? Too much dust, I'm sure dust can be even more dangerous to lunges. Perhaps they will demand customers to proof that dust doesn't contain asbestos.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Wrong as can be!
by Janvl on Fri 27th Nov 2009 22:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Wrong as can be!"
Janvl Member since:
2007-02-20

Another one that has never seen the consequences, having an opinion is good but base it on some facts.
Your comment is a sign of being utterly uninformed.
"Should smoking be banned? No it's not that dangerous"

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Wrong as can be!
by AirIntake on Fri 27th Nov 2009 22:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Wrong as can be!"
AirIntake Member since:
2009-10-29

One doesn't have to witness people dying from smoking to know that you are an idiot. There are many things that are more dangerous than smoking that aren't banned (guns, vehicles, cyanide, alcohol, McDonald's food).

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Wrong as can be!
by red_devel on Sat 28th Nov 2009 00:58 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Wrong as can be!"
red_devel Member since:
2006-03-30

One doesn't have to witness people dying from smoking to know that you are an idiot. There are many things that are more dangerous than smoking that aren't banned (guns, vehicles, cyanide, alcohol, McDonald's food).


An important difference between cigarettes and all of those things you listed is that cigarettes are highly addictive. Well, of course, alcohol is also addictive, but the majority (~90%) of the population can indulge, and even over-indulge, on alcohol at a regular rate without becoming addicted. Everyone who smokes with any consistency for even a short period of time WILL become addicted.

I'm not saying that people aren't still accountable for their own actions, and that you aren't stupid for starting smoking in this day in age when all the information is available. I'm also not, however, losing any sleep over the "poor tobacco industry" being taxed into oblivion. After years of marketing their toxic products to children to get them addicted at the youngest possible age, they're only reaping the seeds they themselves have sown.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Wrong as can be!
by tweakedenigma on Sat 28th Nov 2009 05:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Wrong as can be!"
tweakedenigma Member since:
2006-12-27

alcohol, McDonald's food.

An important difference between cigarettes and all of those things you listed is that cigarettes are highly addictive. Well, of course, alcohol is also addictive, but the majority (~90%) of the population can indulge, and even over-indulge, on alcohol at a regular rate without becoming addicted. Everyone who smokes with any consistency for even a short period of time WILL become addicted.


First I have seen many many cases where people have been just as addicted to Fast Food and Alcohol as Tobacco. As was stated these also have rather large health risks associated with them but for some unknown reason they are not viewed in the same light.

Also speaking as someone that smoked for 10 years plus from the age of 9-21, and quit with no help I can honestly say it was just as easy for me to give up as Fast Food, Regular Drinking and Coffee. The fact of the matter is in all cases you have to decided if you want to keep Smoking or not end of story.

And before I get the I haven't seen the effects I have lost family members to lunge Cancer caused by Smoking, Liver failure caused by Drinking, and heart issues from living off greasy foods. I have seen addiction in many forms and it often comes down to a mental state more then the physical addiction.

Edited 2009-11-28 05:09 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Wrong as can be!
by rkvirani on Sun 29th Nov 2009 17:02 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Wrong as can be!"
rkvirani Member since:
2009-01-19

So pouring alcohol in your computer would void your warranty, excessive smoking should to. Warranty is against the computer not the general health of the user.

I think smokers should pay more to have their computers worked on because most of the time they are disgusting and it is disgusting for a non-smoker to have to work on a smokers computer.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Wrong as can be!
by l3v1 on Sun 29th Nov 2009 08:07 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Wrong as can be!"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

highly addictive.


Well, I've seen gaming addicts being more addicted and sick in every sense of the word then smokers. Addiction doesn't stop at nicotine, alcohol or drugs.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Wrong as can be!
by Soulbender on Sun 29th Nov 2009 10:41 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Wrong as can be!"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Well, of course, alcohol is also addictive, but the majority (~90%) of the population can indulge, and even over-indulge, on alcohol at a regular rate without becoming addicted.


Really? And how is that different from those who smoke socially and somewhat infrequently?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Wrong as can be!
by Inph on Wed 2nd Dec 2009 02:23 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Wrong as can be!"
Inph Member since:
2009-10-05

Drinking small amounts can have health benefits.

Smoking does not.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Wrong as can be!
by modmans2ndcoming on Sat 28th Nov 2009 06:14 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Wrong as can be!"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

yes, but Second Hand Smoke is an assault on me and my family when I am in a public place and subjected to it just because you want to have a smoke.

Reply Score: 8

RE[5]: Wrong as can be!
by wfreund on Sun 29th Nov 2009 17:53 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Wrong as can be!"
wfreund Member since:
2009-08-17

Yes? Well the SUV that you bring your family out into public with is an assault on ME! So is the school bus that your child likely takes to school. I read somewhere that it would take 100 smokers smoking 10 cartons of cigarettes to equal the emissions of a school bus running for a few seconds. Don't know if its true but it sounds right to me.

They've really passed out some potent KoolAid when it comes to the issue of smoking.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Wrong as can be!
by modmans2ndcoming on Sun 29th Nov 2009 18:45 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Wrong as can be!"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

The tools commonly used by society to get people from one place to another is NOT the same thing as someone choosing to unnecessarily breath in cigarette smoke. one is necessary for modern society to function in most US cities, the other is not.

Edited 2009-11-29 18:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Wrong as can be!
by Janvl on Sun 29th Nov 2009 13:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Wrong as can be!"
Janvl Member since:
2007-02-20

I studied medicine, I guess you don't.

Base your opinion upon facts not opinions, just start counting the dying and the dead.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Wrong as can be!
by Janvl on Sun 29th Nov 2009 13:41 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Wrong as can be!"
Janvl Member since:
2007-02-20

Used Computers are mostly very very dirty, keyboard and mouse are the wet dream of every microbiologist, is full of all kind of bacteria.

That smoking has something to do with the warranty? I doubt it, this is just another example how Apple treats his customers. That these machines stink is right, I have had enough of those to service.

What is utterly annoying however is these kind of people plainly wanting to ignore the hazard of smoking, without any knowledge of healthcare. Comparing it with other hazardous habits doen's make it less hazardous.

The biggest problem with smoking is that other people are forced to breath this stinking and poisonous smoke.

SO, if you must smoke, please do not exhale.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Wrong as can be!
by wfreund on Sun 29th Nov 2009 17:57 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Wrong as can be!"
wfreund Member since:
2009-08-17

The biggest problem with driving is that other people are forced to breath this stinking and poisonous smoke.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Wrong as can be!
by Janvl on Mon 30th Nov 2009 14:23 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Wrong as can be!"
Janvl Member since:
2007-02-20

A smoker I guess, the carbon monoxide, tar and other poison have weakened your brain. Your remarks are utterly unintelligent.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Wrong as can be!
by Bruno the Arrogant on Sat 28th Nov 2009 12:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Wrong as can be!"
Bruno the Arrogant Member since:
2009-03-19

Should tobacco be highly taxed? Yes, because people who smoke cost more to society.


Actually, they don't. Studies have shown that they actually save society by dying younger and therefore saving society in health care costs in old age, social security, nursing home costs, etc. A 1997 study in The New England Journal of Medicine found that total medical spending actually would go up if everyone stopped smoking.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Wrong as can be!
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 28th Nov 2009 13:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Wrong as can be!"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You can probably find studies that go either way.

I just find it disgusting how smokers are treated as misfits in society, not worth of medical care. Smoker or not - and smoking is retarded, let me be clear - it does not make you any less of a human, and as such, you have the right to the exact same medical care or support as anyone else.

Car owners and drivers are doing a lot more damage to other human beings than smokers ever did, yet I don't see people claiming we should no longer service or treat car owners.

It's all hypocrisy. Like I said: easy scoring material for politicians - nothing more.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Wrong as can be!
by hashnet on Sun 29th Nov 2009 01:36 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Wrong as can be!"
hashnet Member since:
2005-11-15

I don't care if people destroy their health by smoking.
What bothers me is the throat pains and asthma bouts I experience when near lit cigarettes.
Years ago I gave up going to jazz clubs because of this.
I remember of an employer who told me: "Freedom is, you let us smoke, and we let you cough".
The situation is getting better, though, as smoking is increasingly banned in public places.
I'd hate to have to handle smoke-impregnated material as part of my job.
Now the Apple case is certainly over the top, but it may be a way to swing the pendulum the other way.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Wrong as can be!
by spaceLem on Sat 28th Nov 2009 15:08 UTC in reply to "RE: Wrong as can be!"
spaceLem Member since:
2007-07-26

Should smoking be banned? No it's not that dangerous and by now all should know hazards of smoking.


We have known the hazards of smoking for a very long time (I can't find the reference, but one doctor noticed its dangerous effects on health not long after it was introduced to Britain, but he was quashed by other doctors). However, people still take up smoking, despite being told the risks, and find themselves unable to quit.

Should tobacco be highly taxed? Yes, because people who smoke cost more to society.


No, smokers cost less to society. Smokers die young and they die relatively quickly. They are less of a burden than old people with dementia, who may live many years and require much attention. Also the amount they pay in taxes already pays for their medical treatment. We actually have a net benefit from smokers.

Edited 2009-11-28 15:09 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Wrong as can be!
by AaronD on Sat 28th Nov 2009 01:30 UTC in reply to "Wrong as can be!"
AaronD Member since:
2009-08-19

If you had a tiny little bit of experience with working in a hospital you would not make such unintelligent remarks.

You mean those buildings with the people standing outside dressed in scrubs or white coats chain smoking?

Reply Score: 6

pathetic bunch of wimps
by transputer_guy on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:16 UTC
transputer_guy
Member since:
2005-07-08

Somehow I can easily imagine that many repair tech staff might actually be smokers themselves even if they don't smoke on premises. I doubt they wear any special garb to protect PC from self other than static strap.

I grew up in a house where both parents smoked 20+ fags a day and probably still do. So I suppose that house must now be a toxic dump site that should have been bulldozed along with a huge number of other homes, offices, airplanes, public spaces.

If a smoker asked me to personally fix or clean their PC or Mac, I would have no qualms about it at all. I'd expect it to be more yucky to some degree but I have seen pretty disgusting computer insides before.

The only component that could suffer some damage is the disk drive, but that can be backed up and easily replaced. The PCBs I really doubt would be affected at all. Filters might get clogged but those can be cleaned or changed.

Personally if Apple were to refuse to honor my warranty, I would want to sue them for not stating as much in the terms, that is called deception.

EE that never smoked.

Reply Score: 6

RE: pathetic bunch of wimps
by smashIt on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:25 UTC in reply to "pathetic bunch of wimps"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

If a smoker asked me to personally fix or clean their PC or Mac, I would have no qualms about it at all. I'd expect it to be more yucky to some degree but I have seen pretty disgusting computer insides before.


i already had the pleasure to service a workstation of an extreme smoker
it's a) disgusting and b) has a lot of ash/dust in it thats very agressive towards your lung

in short: the next one can service his pc himselve

The only component that could suffer some damage is the disk drive, but that can be backed up and easily replaced. The PCBs I really doubt would be affected at all. Filters might get clogged but those can be cleaned or changed.


unlike dust, ash is a conductor

Reply Score: 11

RE: pathetic bunch of wimps
by looncraz on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:29 UTC in reply to "pathetic bunch of wimps"
looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

I've seen half a dozen machines destroyed by smokers. Normally it is in the PSU, or the heat-sinks of the CPU.

I does, normally, take many years before the tars build up enough to be a problem by themselves, however the dust that is attracted is a killer.

You do realize that dust can conduct electricity, right?

The higher the voltage/current and the shorter the path, the easier the death. Which is why the PSU is the most likely place of failure.

The second biggest problem is with the CPU heatsink, where the fins are clogged and the CPU overheats for, often, very long durations without notice.

Third? The fans themselves can often fail thanks to tar on the bearings, seizing the fans prematurely.

Fourth? The tar + dust combo can short out exposed solder points causing instability, and possibly failure ( I have yet to see a machine die this way, however ).

Hard drives are more resilient, except the tar blocks some cooling effect. Otherwise, they are sealed units, and the electronics are on the underside in most configurations so the build-up is minimal.

Optical drives fail most often. If a customer complains that their drive stopped working, I always ask if they smoke near the computer. More often than not, they are smokers.

Bars are my favorite clients :-) I charge more for filters, and I schedule cleanings.

Of course, I would say a automotive shops are worse still.

--The loon

Reply Score: 11

RE[2]: pathetic bunch of wimps
by Lennie on Sun 29th Nov 2009 13:48 UTC in reply to "RE: pathetic bunch of wimps"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Yes, I also service computers at an automotive shop. They seem to have some really nasty dust.

They seem to have some very small dust particles.

I'm actually impressed by how well computers seem to just chug along in such an evironment.

Reply Score: 2

RE: pathetic bunch of wimps
by StephenBeDoper on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:50 UTC in reply to "pathetic bunch of wimps"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

Somehow I can easily imagine that many repair tech staff might actually be smokers themselves even if they don't smoke on premises. I doubt they wear any special garb to protect PC from self other than static strap.


A tech I worked with a few years ago was a heavy smoker, yet he disliked working on computers if the owner had smoked near the computer. I remember him talking about getting queasy and having a fairly bad headache after working on a computer that had had an ashtray sitting in front of a fan intake (much of the inside was coated in sticky brown gunk, especially the fans).

That's the main problem with smoking around computers - the fans suck in some of the smoke, then it cools, turns into residue and sticks to everything.

If a smoker asked me to personally fix or clean their PC or Mac, I would have no qualms about it at all. I'd expect it to be more yucky to some degree but I have seen pretty disgusting computer insides before.


Aside from it being unpleasant, there are legitimate health concerns: nicotine can be absorbed through the skin, and it can kill an adult human being in a high enough dosage/concentration:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine_poisoning

That said, it probably isn't possible to absorb a fatal amount of nicotine through the skin while working on a computer (except, maybe, if you cut your hand). And a cheap pair of rubber gloves would probably be an effective safety measure in most cases.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: pathetic bunch of wimps
by red_devel on Sat 28th Nov 2009 00:50 UTC in reply to "RE: pathetic bunch of wimps"
red_devel Member since:
2006-03-30

(much of the inside was coated in sticky brown gunk, especially the fans).

Much like, I'd imagine, his lungs!

http://www.smokerslungs.com/

Makes me wanna run right out and pick up a pack!

Reply Score: 2

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

"(much of the inside was coated in sticky brown gunk, especially the fans).

Much like, I'd imagine, his lungs!
"

True - but thankfully, I don't do tech support on his lungs (to state a admittedly-glib version of the concept of "personal responsibility").

http://www.smokerslungs.com/

Makes me wanna run right out and pick up a pack!


Here (Canada) they print those pictures on the packaging of cigarettes, tobacco products, etc.

Reply Score: 2

Well..
by neowolf on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:18 UTC
neowolf
Member since:
2005-07-06

I really think such a thing should be warned about in the warranty, even if in the fine print first off.

Though to be frank, I can kinda understand wanting to refuse working on a machine if it's nasty. If they were smoking around the hardware so much that you can really tell - YEESH I bet that is nasty!

Reply Score: 1

looncraz
Member since:
2005-07-24

I really hate to side with Apple on this one, but I almost must.

I do not believe service should be outright denied, but I do believe an additional fee should be incurred for cleaning the machine.

I do this with my customers, but I fairly warn them not to smoke around the machines as it destroys the value of every part inside. You can never clean a PCB well enough to get rid of that odor!

You can't even get it out of aluminum!

I just rebuilt a machine I made 3 years ago for a customer who smoked. I warned them then that smoking near the machine, but the advice was ignored.

Gummed up fans and PSU caused a massive failure, shorting the 12+V to +5, over-volting and burning out pretty much everything ( this is an extreme case, but not my first such case ).

The hard drive operated well enough to extract the data to a replacement drive.

I spent two hours just cleaning the machine, the cost of which I passed on to my customer ( that is $70 at my rate ).

Even after cleaning everything I could, and replacing MOBO, CPU, RAM, HDDx2, & PSU, and disassembling the entire chassis and cleaning with the best stuff I can find + lemon juice + acetone + alcohol + tetracycline, then waxing everything and allowing the plastic to soak... the case still smelled of cigarettes to me.


The other components are simply uncleanable. As such, Apple can't even refurbish the machine. It is a total loss.

It is very much as if you just ran it over with a 2-ton roller and made a pancake.

And Apple should not be required to accept the responsibility for such destruction.

Besides, I am certain there is a clause regarding excessive user-inflicted damage. This would fall under that heading.

If not, Apple will need to revise their warranties.

--The loon

Reply Score: 13

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I'm a non-smoker, in fact I'm mildly allergic to smoke (not just from tobacco). I also hate working on a computer that has lived in a smoker's house. My best friend and former girlfriend of six years used to smoke heavily around her computer and I was replacing optical drives every year or so for her, as well as de-tarring the rest of the components.

All that said, I won't side with Apple on this one until they include a smoking clause in their AppleCare warranty. After all, it is an outside influence on the hardware, which really only needs one or two sentences in the warranty disclaimer. Until they do so, however, I think they are wrong to exclude such systems.

Reply Score: 2

looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

I agree fully. No disclaimer, Apple is on the hook.

I would imagine that there is some generic clause which would cover user recklessness ( that word is wrong in every way, I swear ).

I would need to read the promissory, and I just don't care that much to do that tonight.

--The loon

Reply Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Exactly, like I said in the article: include a no smoking clause and Apple would be well within their rights.

Reply Score: 1

krreagan Member since:
2008-04-08

Exactly, like I said in the article: include a no smoking clause and Apple would be well within their rights.


BS! This is not about being a smoker! It's about contaminating your computer with a hazardus substance! and that's all!

If you make your computer a hazard to work on then Apple is not responsible to fix it! This is completely the users fault!

KRR

Reply Score: 1

looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

A no-smoking clause is excessively narrowly focused ( say that 5x @ 4GHz... ).

That said, I envision the following as probably already existing in the promissory:

"Apple is not responsible under the terms of this agreement for damages inflected through intentional or reckless abuse."

Otherwise, such a clause should exist.

BUT, Apple is not saying they are denying on these grounds, but due to health-hazards posed ( if I read & remember correctly ).

In such a case, Apple is obliged to honor the contractual obligations, but would find it in their best interest to add a clause as follows:

"Apple, under the terms of this agreement, is not required to honor its obligations for equipment which has been returned in a condition which poses a health or environmental hazard.

Hazardous equipment conditions include, but are not limited to, the following:

Any equipment exposed to -
- Tobacco Tar
- Feces, Urine, Sewage
- Excessive Microbial Accumulations (Mold, Fungal)
- Blood
- etc...

Apple reserves the exclusive right to determine what deems a hazardous equipment condition."

Of course, Apple can then deny or offer service for a charge, their choice.

Just my idea.

--The loon

Edited 2009-11-29 05:02 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

I do this with my customers, but I fairly warn them not to smoke around the machines as it destroys the value of every part inside.


Tjis is a consideration I take into mind when buying used stuff for cheap, not only computers, but amateur radio devices, too.

Recently, I wanted to buy a used VHF mobile radio, and I had the chance to inspect and test it before buying. The seller said: "I would give you the device for... let's say... 50 Euro?" I *sniff* *sniff*: "Smells ugly, like long term smoking. I'll give you 20 Euro for it, it's not good anymore."

As a rule of thumb, the value of a device gets halved when the device smelly smoky. Imagine a new netbook for 200 Euro, used two weeks by a heavy smoker, value now 100 Euro (maximum).

And: No, you can't clean it in a way so one can't smell the smoke anymore.

My first contact with a smoker's PC was when I had to fix the janitor's son's PC. It was yellow. Switching it on blew the fuse of our working room (we were happy to have an own separately fused circuit). The power switch - remember that it was a REAL switch in AT times - had transformed into an undefinable mass made of plastics and metal, the whole PSU was filled with a combination of dust and smokers' garbage, a real fine short ircuit.

Even after cleaning everything I could, and replacing MOBO, CPU, RAM, HDDx2, & PSU, and disassembling the entire chassis and cleaning with the best stuff I can find + lemon juice + acetone + alcohol + tetracycline, then waxing everything and allowing the plastic to soak... the case still smelled of cigarettes to me.


I think that non-smokers are more sensitive for the smell of smoke than smokers... I'm a non-smoker myself so I can't tell if smokers smell their own stuff. :-)

I spent two hours just cleaning the machine, the cost of which I passed on to my customer ( that is $70 at my rate ). [...] The other components are simply uncleanable. As such, Apple can't even refurbish the machine. It is a total loss.


Coming back on topic: Apple should charge extra money if their service personnel has to work with smoke damaged computers, instead of no service at all. This should be stated in some written form (manual or EULA or who knows what) when the Mac is being purchased.

The question is: Will a customer be fine when he is told that his machine is damaged (due to smoke), but will still work for some time in this condition? Or should there be an offer to replace the damaged parts (not for free, of course)?

It is very much as if you just ran it over with a 2-ton roller and made a pancake.

And Apple should not be required to accept the responsibility for such destruction.


Allthough smoking is some kind of "commodity culture" and is a drug accepted by society, in my opinion it's completely valid to interpret smoking at a computer as a kind of destruction of this computer.

You can compare this with a similar situation: If I told my IT shop that me and my friends are smoking in the server room all day and night, and we've switched off the air condition, and spilled coffee and crackers all over the servers, and then demanding that they repair the systems for free... that would be an interesting talk. :-)

Reply Score: 2

If smoking contributed sure...otherwise no
by sigzero on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:21 UTC
sigzero
Member since:
2006-01-03

"The only way in which a company could deny repairs for smokers is if the smoke actually is the cause of the malfunction, and that this is classified as an external influence not covered by warranty/AppleCare, but it is quite clear in these cases that's not what happened."


That is the way I would roll on it.

Reply Score: 2

bfr99 Member since:
2007-03-15

Nonsense. Repair charges especially labor are often computed based on averages. If Apple can show that on average smoker's machine fail more often than non-smoker's they do not have to justify an extra charge for an individual machine. Presumably even working on a smoker's machine releases carcinogenic particles to the repair shop environment requiring better air filtration, more frequent cleaning, etc. Just ask a hotel about their extra expenses to maintain smoker's rooms.

Reply Score: 1

graigsmith
Member since:
2006-04-05

it should void the warranty. having worked as a computer tech, and having seen some of the gross computers people brought in. i totally understand.

these computers smelled worse than an ash tray. and they had thick sticky combination of goo and dust covering everything. Often so bad that the fans wouldn't even move. and it would get all over your hands. completely disgusting. not only that but it ruins the whole computer, all the fans, motherboard everything gets ruined by it.

Reply Score: 5

Karitku Member since:
2006-01-12

Just because its nasty doesn't mean its unhealthier than normal dust, show the proofs! What is happening here is starting point of f--king customer rights. It's pretty common that nowdays manufacturers demand lower repair rates even when they know there products are shit in quality point. Ask anyone who works on warranty repair more than 10 years they know how much more manufacturers are pushing customers these days.

Reply Score: 3

apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

it should void the warranty. having worked as a computer tech, and having seen some of the gross computers people brought in. i totally understand.

these computers smelled worse than an ash tray. and they had thick sticky combination of goo and dust covering everything. Often so bad that the fans wouldn't even move. and it would get all over your hands. completely disgusting. not only that but it ruins the whole computer, all the fans, motherboard everything gets ruined by it.


Yeah, well we are all complaining about the inside of a PC just imagine the inside of someones lungs. Who gives a shit about the PC, get people to stop smoking. Both my grandparents died of smoking induced illness, its not trip trust me. Not to get all PSA or anything but like everyone including Apple has mentioned the smoke does considerable damage to anything and everything in its surroundings. Its a stupid, stupid habit if you ask me.

Reply Score: 3

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Who cares if it's gross? It's your damn job to fix it. Now, if it can be proven that the gross stuff is also harmful that's a different story.
Also, does this mean I can expect Apple to only employ non-smokers as techs? I mean, i sure wouldn't want some smoker to fix my computer and gross it up.

Reply Score: 2

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

Who cares if it's gross? It's your damn job to fix it.


So if someone brought you a computer smeared with feces, you would service it without complaint?

Now, if it can be proven that the gross stuff is also harmful that's a different story.


The toxicity of nicotine is well-established, and it has been for several hundred years (at least since the 1700s). It was even widely-used as a pesticide at one time.

Also, does this mean I can expect Apple to only employ non-smokers as techs? I mean, i sure wouldn't want some smoker to fix my computer and gross it up.


Does Apple let their techs smoke on the job? And are you planning to leave your computer with Apple techs for a year or two? Those are about the only circumstances that would make your concern valid.

Reply Score: 2

Increased chance of failure
by Alleister on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:32 UTC
Alleister
Member since:
2006-05-29

I repaired PCs for a living for a couple of years and i bet any technician that repaired home users PCs can tell you that smoking greatly increases the chance of your PC to fail. A gluey patina of tar with dust is poison to ventilators, decreases the effectiveness of coolers and thus even decreases live of electrical components (they age faster when exposed too increased temperature).

So i think this is really just an idea to decrease support costs. And rightly so. Support costs are a mix calculation carried by all buyers. Why the hell should i be paying for the repairs of an idiot who thinks he looks cooler when he is sporting a cigarette in front of his hardware?

Reply Score: 5

gasmask
by renhoek on Fri 27th Nov 2009 21:53 UTC
renhoek
Member since:
2007-04-29

If second hand smoke is so bad, give those employees gas masks. Why does nobody on this planet suggest that? Construction workers wear protective gear, so the apple employees could do this as well.

Under the "second hand smoke kills" dogma it's now not allowed to smoke in coffeeshops here. It's really really wierd.

Reply Score: 0

RE: gasmask
by JohnFlux on Sat 28th Nov 2009 06:52 UTC in reply to "gasmask"
JohnFlux Member since:
2007-01-04

Are you seriously saying that's it wierd that you can't smoke around other people who are trying to drink/eat ? You honestly can't see why other people might not like that?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: gasmask
by renhoek on Sat 28th Nov 2009 10:08 UTC in reply to "RE: gasmask"
renhoek Member since:
2007-04-29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_coffee_shop#Smoking_on_the_pr...

I meant a dutch coffeeshop. You are still allowed to smoke pure cannabis (yeah, like that is healthy). I totally understand you are not allowed to smoke in a restaurants.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: gasmask
by moochris on Sat 28th Nov 2009 10:17 UTC in reply to "RE: gasmask"
moochris Member since:
2009-03-20

Nevermind, he explained he was referring to a Dutch coffeeshop, I was too late on the reply ;)

Edited 2009-11-28 10:18 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Never every try smoking!
by gogothebee on Fri 27th Nov 2009 22:11 UTC
gogothebee
Member since:
2009-02-05

Thom, you are young intelligent man. Never EVER try smoking, like you did until now. This is one of the most stupid and hated by me things in this world. I smoked when I was 15-17 years old, but I stopped.

I urge everybody - please, don't kill yourselves slowly!

Reply Score: 3

RE: Never every try smoking!
by Doc Pain on Sat 28th Nov 2009 10:28 UTC in reply to "Never every try smoking!"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

Thom, you are young intelligent man. Never EVER try smoking, like you did until now. This is one of the most stupid and hated by me things in this world. I smoked when I was 15-17 years old, but I stopped.


I can only second that: I started smoking (when I was 19 years old) out of boredom, and quit it some weeks after that because of exactly the same reason. It's not worth the money. It makes you smell like a garbage can. And: No, you don't look handsome and masculine with a cigarette in your mouth. :-)

Reply Score: 2

Hidden excuses
by davonshire on Fri 27th Nov 2009 22:17 UTC
davonshire
Member since:
2007-11-15

In all of this one must really consider. Does the consumer get a chance to review all the conditions that a manufacturer will and will not service a product it manufactures?

What happens if someone finds that a product like 'Fabreeze, or Glade Air Freshener, or Coffee stains' were hazardous?

If you buy something with 'at the time' reasonable expectations of warranty coverage. Why would you not buy something because someone believes what you have in your environment is hazardous to them?

And considering the outrageous failure rates of many Apple products. Do you really expect your Mac in the pub to be refused Warranty coverage because your patrons smoked a cigar?

If the human race is so fragile that this is a serious life threatening concern. We've obviously out witted nature and evolution.

Cheers.

Davon Shire.

Reply Score: 2

It's gross but...
by mrhasbean on Fri 27th Nov 2009 23:05 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

...it won't kill you if you take the proper precautions. However they need only run with the "we believe the smoke residue caused the problem" line and they'd get away with it - it would be no different than any external event causing the problem, it wouldn't be covered by warranty. I think doing it the way they are here though will open them up to a slap on the wrist by some authority or anti-descrimination group. Not a clever move really...

Reply Score: 2

"Should Smoking Void Warranties?"
by mrhasbean on Fri 27th Nov 2009 23:21 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

I suppose it also depends on whether this is a generic question.

Someone once asked me "Do you smoke after intercourse?" to which I answered "I don't know, never really looked" but I dare say our friends at Ansell would void any warranty on their product (if any exists to begin with) should there be any proof of post action smouldering or indeed a full on inferno...

:P

Reply Score: 3

Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

Someone once asked me "Do you smoke after intercourse?" to which I answered "I don't know, never really looked"


Doctor, can I bath with diarrhea? - Sure, if you can get the bathtub filled...

Can you pass water? - Hot or cold water?

I mean, can you pee into that cup over there? - No, I can't pee that far away.

Does it burn when passing water? - I don't know, never ignited it.

Sorry, couldn't resist. :-)

Reply Score: 2

And next thing you know...
by JonathanBThompson on Fri 27th Nov 2009 23:34 UTC
JonathanBThompson
Member since:
2006-05-26

Apple will be forced to put such things in their warranty to be painfully explicit like:

Do not allow cat to pee on computer.
Do not drop iPod Touch into toilet with crap in it.
Do not drive over computer with any moving vehicle.
Computer is NOT a footstool: usage as such will void warranty.
...

Thom, use your imagination: anything that is human-induced by carelessness/thoughtlessness (let's face it: the majority of smokers don't give a crap about the rights of others to not have their space and air polluted by improperly disposed-of butts and all the smoke) of the user that's readily avoided should be null and void for coverage, because common sense (but you clearly don't have any of that) should apply. If such smoke is so "harmless" or should need to be explicitly mentioned, why on earth are there makes of toothpaste that explicitly advertise (or have in the past) about cleaning out such tough stains as tobacco? Combine that with the fact that built-up burnt tobacco/cigarette smoke has all kinds of nasty toxic things, even before you concentrate it (look it up, seriously, tar is just one of the things) and you add in all the little details of things getting clogged up (like anything that's around smokers too much - DUH!) and it makes perfect sense to disallow obviously smoke-infested things as valid warranty repairs. Perhaps it's no longer there, but I remember many years ago (Before you were even born) that smoking and computers were explicitly stated as a bad combination on computer hardware manuals.

But, no, if you want to be a hypocrite: go right along expecting Apple to manufacture things where they must bend over backwards not to put any potentially non earth-friendly manufacturing method or materials into their products, and yet they're forced to warranty stuff abused by idiots and infested with a toxic dump coating them on the inside. Then again, it appears your general pattern is that corporations have far less right to expect that their needs are even considered over that of customers or those that would stomp all over them, simply because they're less powerful.

Reply Score: 7

RE: And next thing you know...
by righard on Sat 28th Nov 2009 01:28 UTC in reply to "And next thing you know..."
righard Member since:
2007-12-26

No no, that is very different. The things you listed a directly related to the harm of your computer. Smoking is not directly related or obvious related to the harm of your computer. Actually for better or worse (worse I guess) a lot of people smoke. People smoking in a room is a normal everyday circumstance. If an computer gets damaged due to normal circumstances it’s an engineering problem and you should get warranty.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: And next thing you know...
by WereCatf on Sat 28th Nov 2009 05:38 UTC in reply to "RE: And next thing you know..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

People smoking in a room is a normal everyday circumstance.

I suppose that depends a lot on where you live. Here it's normal that people go outside to smoke. I only know one single person who smokes indoors and no one wants to visit him due to the horrible smell and stains on everything. Everyone else smokes outside without exceptions.

And as quite a few people here have mentioned, all the icky stuff from smoking tends to gather up in the computer, clogging everything up, causing fans to fail and so on.

How do you propose to fix that if it's only an engineering problem? Sure, you could install filters in every single hole in the case, but then you'd need more cooling as they also decrease the airflow, and you'd need to change the filters regularly or you'd just end up in the same situation as without them.

Reply Score: 4

RE: And next thing you know...
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 28th Nov 2009 09:55 UTC in reply to "And next thing you know..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Do not allow cat to pee on computer.
Do not drop iPod Touch into toilet with crap in it.
Do not drive over computer with any moving vehicle.
Computer is NOT a footstool: usage as such will void warranty.


Nice demagogy there.

All those things are obviously dangerous to electronics. With smoking, that is not clear - and in fact, is most likely utter nonsense. As such, if Apple wants to deny repairs because of it, they'll have to include a specific clause to that end.

It's all very simple, really.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: And next thing you know...
by Chaos_One on Sat 28th Nov 2009 17:56 UTC in reply to "RE: And next thing you know..."
Chaos_One Member since:
2005-07-18

When I started working as a system administrator people were still allowed to smoke at work. Opening up a PC it was very easy to tell if the user was a smoker or not. Hell, you could even look at the keyboard and see.

Smoking creates a nasty mess inside the machine and I personally wouldn't like to touch any parts that are covered with sticky gore.

If such a machine failed, for whatever reason, we'd just trash it.

Reply Score: 2

JonathanBThompson Member since:
2006-05-26

No, your assertions that it's most likely complete and utter nonsense is complete and utter nonsense: it seems you've not been around long enough to see what happens to machinery of any type with such contaminants. Anything that accelerates cruft buildup (and sticky stuff from cigarette smoke absolutely makes things a mess) contributes towards long-term (and sometimes short-term) failure where cooling needs to happen, things need to move smoothly, or optical qualities need to be maintained. Have you ever worked inside a cleanroom environment? Yeah, that's what I thought! Well, I have, so I strongly suspect I'm far more aware of such matters than you are, as to how things get sticky, static-prone, etc. where even added moisture causes a problem (yes, I've seen an environmental control system go wonky for humidity, and watched cleanroom robots rust before my eyes, because you can't lubricate them the same way) and stuff in cigarettes and the like, well, that contributes to more stuff that combines with ambient humidity to... make a sticky mess that impedes correct functioning of electrical and mechanical things.

Or, in other words, as in most things: you're purely speaking out of your ass, because you're certainly not using your experience [none] or your head on such things, and there's plentiful evidence in this thread alone that you're completely full of yourself on your assertion that it's most likely complete and utter nonsense.

Reply Score: 1

v Meh
by markob on Fri 27th Nov 2009 23:39 UTC
RE: Meh
by krreagan on Sat 28th Nov 2009 00:34 UTC in reply to "Meh"
krreagan Member since:
2008-04-08

Hmmm, The tar in the smoke sticks to surfaces, thereby causing dust and skin particles to collect faster then under normal operating conditions, and a DVD player depends on a very clean surface (the laser emitter). Why should Apple have to pay for cleaning your contamination from their device. Smoke is not a normal environmental contaminant.

Reply Score: 1

It's not about being a smoker.
by krreagan on Sat 28th Nov 2009 00:29 UTC
krreagan
Member since:
2008-04-08

Come on guy's! It's not about being a smoker in and of itself! It's about contaminating your computer! I smoked for 22years but only outside so my computer was never gunked up (with smoke residue at least).

This is just a generic statement that if you contaminate your computer with _any_ hazardous chemicals, radioactive materials... that can be harmful (within reason) to the tech working on the computer, then your warrantee is null & void! and yes tar is hazardous.

Well of course it is!

KRR

Reply Score: 4

OurGodlivz Member since:
2007-11-06

I have to agree with KKR. I also note that no one has mentioned the varied regulations that OSHA ( www.osha.gov ) places on companies. I am sure that easily one of those regulations is likely what is causing Apple to do this.

Reply Score: 1

I don't blame them.
by Finchwizard on Sat 28th Nov 2009 02:07 UTC
Finchwizard
Member since:
2006-02-01

The smoke doesn't damage anything, but generally, people who are smoking in their house, typically have a lot more dust in there as well.

Now I'm not saying that everyone is like that, but that's what I've noticed from fixing computers.

And when you open a smokers computer, it is very foul, laden with dust, absolutely terrible smell and I always feel sick after fixing it too.

And no employee should have to put up with the health risks of fixing the computer. That's why they were denied, not because of the Warranty.

And lets be serious, if someone refuses to fix it, it must of been pretty damn bad honestly. There should be more charged because of additional protection and additional cleaning it requires.

Reply Score: 2

RE: I don't blame them.
by Doc Pain on Sat 28th Nov 2009 10:40 UTC in reply to "I don't blame them."
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

The smoke doesn't damage anything, but generally, people who are smoking in their house, typically have a lot more dust in there as well.


Dust is a matter of how many persons are in the house, too, because it consists (at a high percentage) of offloaded skin particles. Animals have the same effect, especially the hair, and I'm not talking about the hair bibres that you can actually see.

In opposite to a smoker's products, this kind of dust is very dry and less critical than the glue-like nicotine fumes which tends to get in everywhere and stay there, no matter how much ventilation you employ.

Reply Score: 3

v BS if you ask me!
by corbintechboy on Sat 28th Nov 2009 03:41 UTC
v RE: BS if you ask me!
by KrimZon on Sat 28th Nov 2009 10:45 UTC in reply to "BS if you ask me!"
RE[2]: BS if you ask me!
by flynn on Sat 28th Nov 2009 14:10 UTC in reply to "RE: BS if you ask me!"
flynn Member since:
2009-03-19

Would a non-smoker openly jacking off offend you or not? Is it right that people should be banned from masturbating in bars, restaurants and public places? Would you fix a computer with a build up of seminal fluid on it? It's probably harmless enough and everything kills anyway.

Your comment reminds me of a portion of Dave Chappelle's standup.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzs_VkACuZk

Edited 2009-11-28 14:10 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: BS if you ask me!
by corbintechboy on Sat 28th Nov 2009 17:51 UTC in reply to "RE: BS if you ask me!"
corbintechboy Member since:
2006-05-02

Hmmm..I suppose that smoking compares to bodily fluids and public masturbation... Lol ok!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: BS if you ask me!
by KrimZon on Sun 29th Nov 2009 12:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: BS if you ask me!"
KrimZon Member since:
2009-06-24

I just don't get why emitting clouds of particulate matter that other people inhale isn't more repulsive to most people.

I guess choking body odour could be another analogy but I doubt smokers would be able smell that as strongly as non-smokers. Whereas the majority of people don't want someone else's fluids on them.

Similar to how many non-smokers don't really want to inhale someone elses chemicals.

Reply Score: 1

Grounds?
by malxau on Sat 28th Nov 2009 05:32 UTC
malxau
Member since:
2005-12-04

If Apple has been gladly pocketing money promising to provide warranty and, without prior notice, fails to provide it, I am perplexed why smoking can be considered grounds to escape their end of the contract.

If Apple believes it is infeasible to repair affected machines, it retains the option of replacement. Refunding AppleCare is insufficient; this means that Apple retains the money where no warranty is required, and pays out money paid in where claims occur. It's win-win for Apple in that case, hardly a good faith warranty.

If Apple really doesn't want to provide warranty to these machines, it needs to make that clear in advance, in its AppleCare contracts, prior to accepting money under a warranty agreement.

Reply Score: 1

Read the Apple Care Agreement...
by tomcat on Sat 28th Nov 2009 06:52 UTC
tomcat
Member since:
2006-01-06

If it has explicit exemptions for machines used in smoke-filled environments, then there is no argument, one way or another, and Apple is justified; but if, on the other hand, this is a case where it's not clearly documented in the warranty terms and Apple is just trying to foist some kind of idiotic political correctness/social engineering onto customers, then Apple should be sued.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Gone fishing
by Gone fishing on Sat 28th Nov 2009 06:55 UTC
Gone fishing
Member since:
2006-02-22

Looks like Apple is confident of winning the Paystar case and is dreaming up something to keep it team of belligerent lawyers busy. Maybe Apple if forgetting that upsetting you customers is a dangerous thing in business.

The health argument doesn't work it's Apples responsibility to protect its workers and dust is harmful to health is Apple going to refuse warranty for dusty computers or if you have carpets in your home?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Gone fishing
by Gone fishing on Sun 29th Nov 2009 08:33 UTC in reply to "Comment by Gone fishing"
Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

I feel that some folk need to separate the issues more than they are doing.

OK smoking I’m a non smoker and biologist it’s a bad thing to do – I’m now of an age where I know too many people who’ve died from smoking and it’s not a nice way to go. So you smokers I’d rather you gave up – feel stressed go buy yourself a beer (I know that alcohols not good but the damaged coursed is not comparable.) I can see good arguments for banning tobacco entirely, but am not happy with the state controlling even more of what folk do or not do.

Apple is arguing this on health of its workers; well I can see that a tobacco smelling PC might not be nice but … the health grounds are, however, spurious the PC will not be giving off tobacco smoke their may be tar residues on the components but as these will not be going into the air and I’ve not heard of any one getting skin cancer in this way (anyway thin gloves solve this problem.). Dust is however, a health problem, highly allergenic, full of unpleasant microorganisms etc – so would it be OK if Apple says you’ve got a dusty PC therefore your warranties void or you’ve got carpets in your house so we are not respecting the warranty – I think not. Where does it end? There is evidence of you cooking curry in your house our workers cannot be exposed to trace amounts of chill or there are trace amounts of pork fat on the PC components and this will offend our Muslim or *** workers?

The masturbation argument – you masturbate in front of you PC in the privacy of your own home – no problem as long as I don’t have to watch or be involved. I don’t think an AV company for example should be allowed to say we’re not supporting our product because we have evidence that you have viewed porn on your PC it would be non of their business same with Apple and smoking.

The neglect and misuse argument, the article claimed that apple was using health not neglect or misuse and so its not relevant, however, let say this is used; I don’t think this would be reasonable grounds for voiding the warranty unless it can be shown that the smoking explicitly and recklessly damaged the PC. Otherwise it looks like the thin end of the wedge, we’re not respecting the warrant because you used your PC in the kitchen, because you have carpets in the house, because you have a cat and its hairs got inside the power supple unit. Why should I have to pay to keep cat owners happy?

Reply Score: 2

Amazing
by gbil on Sat 28th Nov 2009 07:00 UTC
gbil
Member since:
2008-01-05

It is really amazing how these things only happen in the US.

Apple again tries to set some rules under the table that only comfort its business. It is up to the consumers to resist but I am not sure how this is aided from the US consumer services.

And you know what, Apple has enough money to create a sealed room and have people wearing uniforms so that are not exposed to any danger and can fix the pc.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by Gregory Isaacs
by Gregory Isaacs on Sat 28th Nov 2009 08:28 UTC
Gregory Isaacs
Member since:
2006-06-30

I am a smoker myself and I'm not proud of it. Smoking is unhealthy and addictive and I want to stop as soon as possible.
But ... I wish people would be as emotional about exhaust gas pollution as they are about smokers. I work in a building right beside on of the streets with the highest traffic in our big city and I really don't want to know what those emissions did to my lungs.

Not that I want to weigh things up against one another but sometimes I think that people are offered things to distract them from other ones. We have severe pollution problems all around the world which we should take care of first.
And Apple should probably rather take care of their production plants in China (or whichever company runs those factories for Apple) and reduce pollution over there and strengthen the rights of the workers that probably don't even earn enough money if they are so concerned about the health of the people on this planet.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Gregory Isaacs
by tchristney on Sat 28th Nov 2009 18:43 UTC in reply to "Comment by Gregory Isaacs"
tchristney Member since:
2005-09-21

On page two of the comments there is a link to a site that shows you clearly what city pollution does to lungs compared to smoking. So you don't have to live in ignorance any longer, check it out. While I'd rather not have black polka dots on my lungs, smoking is several orders of magnitude worse.

Reply Score: 1

Good idea
by AIA007 on Sat 28th Nov 2009 12:02 UTC
AIA007
Member since:
2009-09-18

Good idea! ;)

P.S. I non-smoker as well.

Reply Score: 1

Common sense? bah
by Sobakus on Sat 28th Nov 2009 15:38 UTC
Sobakus
Member since:
2009-11-28

Well, I agree that both parts have their reasons, but I think that people is too much in a black or white situation. No levels of grey here, either the computer is as clean and safe as a hospital's operating room or it is already oozing some sticky crap like in a Ghostbusters movie.

My girlfriend is quite a smoker (20 cigarettes a day easily) and I never had a problem servicing her computer. In fact I had a lot more trouble with pets (cat) hair than anything else. How long do you have to smoke close to a computer to become apparent? If the apple computers where still under warranty, did they have time enough to actually build up significant amounts of tar and goo inside? What do people actually smoke for such a thing to happen? I bet it must be something like in this article, counterfeit cigarettes with actual rabbit dung mixed with the tobacco (article in spanish) http://www.europapress.es/islas-canarias/noticia-doce-detenidos-des...

Moreover, given the alleged apple reasons for voiding a warranty, pet hair can be a huge allergy problem for many people. Should pet hair void your warranty just in case someone in the repair shop has such an allergy? Or maybe you should go with a medical certification to the apple shop just to prove that you have no dangerous or contagious disease, just in case you did cough near the computer. The computer could be full of lots of germs, or maybe the owner had swine flu and sneezed big time while at the computer.

Sadly enough common sense seems to be an endangered specie nowadays.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Common sense? bah
by Tuishimi on Sat 28th Nov 2009 17:29 UTC in reply to "Common sense? bah"
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

Looks like the anti-smoke nazi's have modded you down. I wonder what their reasons would be, I certainly would not consider your post off-topic nor is it a troll.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Common sense? bah
by StephenBeDoper on Sun 29th Nov 2009 18:16 UTC in reply to "Common sense? bah"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

In fact I had a lot more trouble with pets (cat) hair than anything else.


True, pet hair is probably a much more common problem (especially pets that shed heavily). But smoking near the computer can exacerbate that problem - the residue makes surfaces inside the computer sticky, causing the pet hair (and dust, etc) to accumulate faster & in greater amounts.

How long do you have to smoke close to a computer to become apparent?


IME, it's not simply smoking around the computer that does it - it's having an ashtray sitting near the computer, especially if there are often lit cigarettes sitting in the ashtray.

But yeah, the really nasty computers I've serviced needed at least a year or two to get to that stage.

Should pet hair void your warranty just in case someone in the repair shop has such an allergy?


In extreme cases? Sure, if a heatsink fan is so clogged with fur that it won't even turn, then I'd say the warranty is void.

But the difference is that you need to have specific allergies to have any health risk from cat hair or dog hair (or rabbit hair, with one computer I've worked on) - but anyone can get nicotine poisoning.

Reply Score: 2

I call balogna on this one.
by Tuishimi on Sat 28th Nov 2009 15:50 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

Smoke needs to be free and particulate to get in and cause harm. It's not free and particulate baked into a computer ... it might stink but oh well. The minute quantities of particles that trigger your nerves in your sinuses couldn't kill a single cell, even over time.

So if employees feel "sick" it's because they don't like the smell, similar to when I gag when someone else throws up. Hell, I guess I should complain to my employer that it really makes me feel ill when my coworkers don't properly indent their code. (It really does drive me crazy). Code should be neat and orderly.

I CAN'T WORK LIKE THIS! AAAAARRRRGGGHHHHH!

Reply Score: 1

Show me the picture
by fuzzywombat on Sat 28th Nov 2009 17:08 UTC
fuzzywombat
Member since:
2006-11-21

This reminds me of the time when a word got around that Sony refused to honor the warranty of a PS3 because the console had too much dust. Internet jumped on the story and vilified Sony has the evil corporate machine that's once again trying to screw the consumers. But then Sony released a picture of the PS3 in question. That PS3 looked like someone shoved a bucket of dirt into it. The amount of dirt was so excessive that it was pretty obvious the damage was due to abuse and neglect on the part of the user. The public opinion turned the other way around pretty quickly after the picture was released.

For me I would like to see a picture of the machine in question which prompted this response from Apple. It's easy to vilify Apple but we have no idea what the condition of the machine to really take sides on this issue. However having said that I do think it's overreaching to make a blanket policy decision for all machines in a smoky environment. I think it has to be handled in case by case bases.

Reply Score: 1

Smoking and Electronics..
by Daemon_ZOGG on Sat 28th Nov 2009 17:17 UTC
Daemon_ZOGG
Member since:
2009-08-26

I have built and repaired PCs, Laptops, & Servers for 15 years. In that time, I can tell you these facts from hands-on experience:
1. The residue from smoking is murder on optical systems(i.e. CD/DVD drives). Even for brief periods per day. Regardless if it is powered on or not.

2. Exposed connectors, extra expansion slots on the system board for example, can be fouled-up with residue.

3. The electronic components on the circuits build up a layer of residue, which over time will reduce the lifetime of the components individually.

For the technician? Job security.
Recommendations for the technician:
Basic Surgical Mask, Non-Latex Surgical Gloves(powderless). Other than that, your ok.

I think apple really needs to do some SERIOUS EDITING to their warranty's fine print section.

;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Smoking and Electronics..
by Tuishimi on Sat 28th Nov 2009 17:31 UTC in reply to "Smoking and Electronics.."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

Definitely. You know what tho'? I live in the Sonoran Desert. EVERY PIECE OF EQUIPMENT I OWN gets filled slowly but surely with fine grit, the dust that blows around here. We are even covered in it, the insides of our automobiles are covered in it, and yeah, it has already destroyed a couple of cheap CD players. I guess all electronics companies should auto-void all warranties for people who live here and own their products. The pollution and dust are a far greater danger to health and electronic equipment than smokers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Smoking and Electronics..
by elanthis on Sun 29th Nov 2009 02:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Smoking and Electronics.."
elanthis Member since:
2007-02-17

Sounds right to me. You put the computer somewhere it isn't designed to operate. If it breaks because of those conditions, why should the manufacturer have to pay to fix it?

That's the deal with smokers' computers. The computer is not designed to operate when it's gummed up with tar. It just isn't, plain and simple. If the user is filling the computer up with tar, the user and the user alone is responsible for fixing it when it breaks. It's not the manufacturer's fault the user was an idiot and abused and neglected the machine, and the manufacturer shouldn't have to pay for it.

The AppleCare warranty explicitly states that user neglect and misuse are not covered by the warranty, so there's no reason Apple should fix computers broken by smoking.

Claiming it as an OSHA violation is a little weird. I'd prefer they just came out and said that smoking damage is not covered.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Smoking and Electronics..
by Tuishimi on Sun 29th Nov 2009 04:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Smoking and Electronics.."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

O.K. then!

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Smoking and Electronics..
by DrillSgt on Sun 29th Nov 2009 05:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Smoking and Electronics.."
DrillSgt Member since:
2005-12-02

That's the deal with smokers' computers. The computer is not designed to operate when it's gummed up with tar. It just isn't, plain and simple. If the user is filling the computer up with tar, the user and the user alone is responsible for fixing it when it breaks. It's not the manufacturer's fault the user was an idiot and abused and neglected the machine, and the manufacturer shouldn't have to pay for it.


So lets just go with that for a moment. An Apple warranty is one year. I smoke and have computers that have been running for 4 years that are not "filled up with tar". It is not possible for it to happen within a warranty period for an Apple computer. Hell, it is not even possible for it to happen within 4 to 5 years of smoking around a computer. I have been fixing computers and servers as a sysadmin for about 15 years, and have never seen a computer damaged by cigarette smoke. That includes my own. The oldest computer I have that still runs is an 8086 running MS DOS, and guess what, even the floppy drive still works on it and has never been filled up with tar. Whether a person smokes or not is a moot point, and Apple needs to back the warranty for their shoddy equipment.

Reply Score: 2

corbintechboy Member since:
2006-05-02

I guess the same can be said from a smoker to the non-smoker.

Only problem with a non-smoker is the stress level of complaining about smokers is not high enough! Non-smokers should die faster worrying about what other people do with the lives they live!

Anything that effects a non-smoker in a bad way is fine with me! Besides, we get taxed really high and WE pay for some of the benefits in society!

Funny how when the smokers post they get a ranking of 0 or worse! We are not winning popularity contests here? Boo Hoo!

Reply Score: 0

Dopes at Apple
by jefro on Sat 28th Nov 2009 22:47 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

Apple sucks!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Dopes at Apple
by krreagan on Sat 28th Nov 2009 23:25 UTC in reply to "Dopes at Apple"
krreagan Member since:
2008-04-08

Apples great!

AAPL's funding my retirement ;) (bought at $12.22) :0

KRR

Edited 2009-11-28 23:25 UTC

Reply Score: 0

Comment by Gregory Isaacs
by Gregory Isaacs on Sun 29th Nov 2009 06:24 UTC
Gregory Isaacs
Member since:
2006-06-30

Just wanted to remind everyone that we are talking about computers. Who cares? Computers are tools, something we use. I bet that most of the people here switch PC's every two or three years, because of software and hardware compatibility and just for fun. We have a TV for over ten years and in the meantime I can't even count how many PC's have gone through my hands. So who cares about a little gunk on the fan or elsewhere?

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by Gregory Isaacs
by Soulbender on Sun 29th Nov 2009 10:34 UTC in reply to "Comment by Gregory Isaacs"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Agree. I swear, PC techies are the biggest pussies of all. Some gunk in the computer, oh my. Try being being a garbageman or something similar then you can complain. As a highly paid white collar worker...shut the fsck up about your work hazards because quite frankly there are none.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Comment by Gregory Isaacs
by Calipso on Sun 29th Nov 2009 12:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Gregory Isaacs"
Calipso Member since:
2007-03-13

Frankly I think garbage men make more than most techs.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Gregory Isaacs
by Soulbender on Mon 30th Nov 2009 02:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Gregory Isaacs"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

0? Heh. Hitting to close to home, eh?

Reply Score: 2

this stinks (in every sense)
by l3v1 on Sun 29th Nov 2009 08:18 UTC
l3v1
Member since:
2005-07-06

I've seen a faily large number of PC insides over the years. I know how dust&co can pile up inside a computer that is never opened and cleaned on a regular basis. I also know people who smoke regularly near their computer (which I find disgusting, since I have no problem with smelling smoke in bars and such, but I can't stand it on clothes or equipment). Thing is, I'd say it would take many years and smoking many times a day every day for a computer to take up so much tar and dust that anyone could call a biohazard. Most of the people don't even have computers that long.

What I'm getting at is that I have a hard time believing an Apple machine could get so much tar and dust under the service period that they'd have proper grounds calling it a biohazard. I find this all quite ridiculous.

Reply Score: 2

Where's all the air filters?
by Brendan on Sun 29th Nov 2009 15:53 UTC
Brendan
Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

How many people's computers have filter/s on the air intakes?

Nobody ever smokes inside this building. It takes about 18 months for a "standard" computer running 24 hours per day to fail due to plain boring dust.

I got a new server about 2 months ago - stock Intel case. There's 3 decent sized fans that either suck air in the front or push air out the back. No air filter. Morons.

I made my own filter out of material intended for an air-conditioner - wasn't too hard to retro-fit, and it fits fairly well. I have to clean out the filter each month.

These computers aren't in a dusty area or anything: standard "office" conditions, no different to most houses and offices all over the world. There isn't air-conditioning running all the time (it's not "server room" conditions), but office equipment should be designed for office conditions (and home equipment should be designed for home conditions).

Let's face it. Computer cases should include air filters and most don't, and most aren't adequate for their intended purpose.

Now, what are the "standard operating condition"? Unfortunately lots of people still do smoke at home, so it's not unreasonable to assume that for domestic equipment "standard operating conditions" may include smoke. Basically what Apple is saying is that they couldn't be stuffed honouring their warranty because their inadequate case failed to protect the sensitive internals from standard operating conditions.

- Brendan

Reply Score: 2

Yes
by ariarinen on Sun 29th Nov 2009 17:31 UTC
ariarinen
Member since:
2009-02-07

Its should void the warranty, its bad for people but also for machines. So yes

Reply Score: 1

Yes, yes, yes, and more yes....
by Phloptical on Sun 29th Nov 2009 21:49 UTC
Phloptical
Member since:
2006-10-10

I don't know about citing the soot as "second-hand smoke" applies, but as a person who takes side jobs doing PC repair stuff for people at work, you see real quick why the term "used in non-smoking environment" means so much.

Apart from the innards of smoker's PC's being absolutely disgusting, all that soot cannot be good for electrical components. Aside from the obvious consequences of smoking in front of your computer, like clogging up the heat sinks and fans, all that crap particulate matter has got to be conductive on some level. At least after enough thickness of it.

Now you introduce smoking in front of an Apple computer or laptop which, by and large, are designed to operate an RCH below complete thermal breakdown, and you have a recipe for disaster given the amount of soot being taken in.

Apple would be real smart to void a smoker's warranty, just like spilling coffee on a laptop voids its warranty.

Edited 2009-11-29 21:51 UTC

Reply Score: 2

one_of_many Member since:
2009-01-01

Only if they indicate as much in the extended warranty before selling it to me. They sure as hell had no problem taking my money.
Apple, Crapple.

Reply Score: 1

Hubris Malus
by one_of_many on Mon 30th Nov 2009 02:22 UTC
one_of_many
Member since:
2009-01-01

This is just another example of Apple's War Against Consumers.
I am a smoker, and I agree that second hand smoke is bad for computer components. However, in order for it to void the Apple Care warranty, it must be articulated beforehand. That Apple would do this merely indicates how high and mighty they really are.
When I look at how Apple truly treats customers, I am struck by the serf-like tone in their approach. I bought my son a MacBook 2 years ago. I soooooooo regret that decision now, but I know that I will NEVER buy another Apple Product.

Reply Score: 1

I do not get the idea...
by Kors on Mon 30th Nov 2009 16:18 UTC
Kors
Member since:
2009-11-30

A heavy smoker for 15+ years, I still do not get the idea of smoking indoors.
I.e. even if I'm going to the bar to drink I'd choose the non-smoking area (these tend to be rather scarce here, the legislation is not too oppressing, but you can always ask the neighbors to smoke outside promising them to do the same) and smoke outdoors exclusively.
Same applies to the office - a while ago we had a huge room full of smokers, but nobody ever considered it decent to smoke inside. Smoking a cigarette is one thing. Breathing smoke (even if you're a smoker) all day long in the office or all night long at your place or at the bar is a completely different story. You'll get headache because of this even if you're a smoker.
Smoking at my place was always a taboo for me, though neither my non-smoking parents nor (later) my non-smoking wife ever prohibited it.
What's the damn problem with going out to the balcony or yard?
So, I have to agree with Apple - the PC covered with tar and ashes inside and outside can and should have warranty voided for multiple reasons (increased likelihood of failure, technicians unwilling to clean the tar off etc). Though, the clear warning about this should be issued BEFORE someone purchases it.

Speaking of the school bus problem discussed here - I have to agree this is neither required nor good for anyone, and produces way too much pollution. What's the problem with kids walking to school by feet? I had absolutely no problem walking to school for ~40 minutes when I was a kid. Even during local cold, windy and snowy winters. My elder son currently goes to school which is ~30 minutes walk away. I intentionally never pick him up from school/get him to school by car. If the kid is old enough to cross the roads safely, he/she should walk as much as possible - will do nothing but good, considering the amount of time modern kids spend sitting indoors. So, having school-buses listed as the 'necessity for civilized society' seems to be a bit of exaggeration, especially taking into account the amount of pollution produced and the increasing number of obese schoolchildren.

Reply Score: 1

Let us cut the c... and get to the point
by Shkaba on Tue 1st Dec 2009 00:16 UTC
Shkaba
Member since:
2006-06-22

Disclaimer:
I am a smoker, am aware of health risks, I do not smoke inside my house, and for god's sake don't patronize me about smoking!

Smoking is legal. If it is legal, than one should presume that computers can be used in an environment where people will be smoking. If the warranty does not implicitly specify that smoking near the computer voids said warranty, then warranty can not be voided.

If someone tries to void a warranty where smoking is not specified as a reason for voiding the same warranty, then they should be charged for fraud!

Reply Score: 1

Apple's mistake
by richmassena on Tue 1st Dec 2009 05:28 UTC
richmassena
Member since:
2006-11-26

I've worked on a couple of exceptionally nasty computers, clogged with tar and loose tobacco. I don't relish the idea of ever working on one in that state again. Provided, the tar or smoke wasn't the cause of the problem, I don't see how Apple can deny the warranty, especially if they didn't spell it out in the warranty agreement.

I'm starting to think this is all part of Apple's market strategy. Their capricious app store behavior, this, their missing desktop option. It's all a plan to keep Apple in their comfortable high-margin niche. Any time Apple becomes too popular, they take it down a notch. They don't want to be the next Dell or Microsoft.

That aside, this situation is fair game for other vendors to step in a explicitly remind potential customers that they will honor warranties on computers that have been smoked around.

Reply Score: 1